January 19, 2011

Categories:

Rep. Peter King's decision not to include some of the harshest non-Muslim critics of American Islam in his hearings on the radicalization of American Muslims next month is drawing the Long Island Republican -- long a prominent critic himself -- fire from his right.

King is typically criticized from the left for making the case that, for instance, 85% of American mosques are controlled by "extremist leadership," but his decision, first reported in POLITICO, to take testimony primarily from Muslims drew the ire of Steve Emerson, whose Investigative Project has long labeled a range of American Muslim leaders radicals -- and who expected to be called at the hearing.

Emerson and King, King said in a statement, were scheduled to meet this afternoon to go over plans for the hearing, whose preparations Emerson was assisting. Instead they're exchanging barbs.

Emerson penned an aggrieved, ten paragraph letter to King today, suggesting he was the victim of McCarthyism:

"Your interview with Politico announcing that I am not going to be a witness came as a shock to me especially in light of the fact that I have been told over and over and over again that no witnesses had been selected. I have dutifully worked with your staff in trying to help you prepare for these meetings but obviously you don’t need my input," he wrote, saying he had planned to share with King, among other documents, an "amazing study" debunking Muslim groups' claims to have assisted law enforcement. "I was even going to bring in a special guest today and a VERY informed and connected source, who could have been very useful , possibly even critical to your hearing, but he too will not attend unless I do," he wrote, continuing:

But now you won’t be needing our new empirical studies or input from my guest. During the days of Senator McCarthy, innocent writers were blacklisted and had to write under pseudonyms because of fear from the accusations of the dictatorial Senator. That you have caved in to the demands of radical Islamists in removing me as a witness, in light of the fact that no one in this country has done more empirical investigations about the attitudes and statements of the established Muslim leadership, shows me, to my utter horror, that McCarthyism is still alive today...

This is really a shame. Its too bad as I had long thought you to be the most courageous member of the House of Representatives in taking on the radical Islamist groups. For years, I had been a long supporter of your singularly courageous efforts to respond to the deception perpetrated by radical Islamic groups in falsely claiming they were “moderate.” I praised your courageous efforts every place I could go. But sadly I cannot do that anymore. I want to wish you good luck and success. .

King, in an emailed statement, pronounced himself "surprised and disappointed" at Emerson's letter:

At no time was it contemplated or suggested to Steve Emerson that he be a witness. I determined early on that to make the most meaningful impact, the lead witnesses would be Muslims who believe their community is being radicalized and that Muslim leaders are not sufficiently cooperating with law enforcement. Law enforcement officials would be also be asked to testify. I assumed that Steve Emerson would support these hearings and provide my staff and me with information and ideas....

It is unfortunate that Steve Emerson who acknowledges that I have been “the most courageous Member of the House of Representatives in taking on the radical Islamists groups” now says I “have caved in to the demands of radical Islamists” solely because he is not going to be a witness—especially since at no time was it ever suggested he would be. Ironically, it now appears that the two most outspoken critics of the radicalization hearing are Steve Emerson and CAIR.

Beneath the barbed exchange is a bitter fight over which Muslim leaders, and which of their critics, are within the political pale, one which King's witness list will help settle.

UPDATE: Emerson emails "I think Mr. King is extraordinarily courageous and brave and I want to congratulate him for holding these hearings that are vital to our national security. I deeply praise him for taking on this critical issue of Islamic radicalization. I apologize to Mr. King for some of the intemperate language I used in my private letter to him. But just one correction: I am not one of two outspoken critics of the hearings. That distinction would belong to Congressman Keith Ellison and CAIR. I very much support Mr. King's hearings."

EMERSON LETTER:

Dear Pete: I am writing this letter more in sorrow than in anger. Since you apparently believe that Keith Ellison is a better witness on Islamic radicalism than me, and since you think that Ellison is a better friend than me, I don’t know what the purpose of the meeting is for today. In fact, let me graciously give up my hour this afternoon to Ellison and his Muslim Brotherhood friends who have called you a “Nazi,” a “bigot,” a “racist,” an “Islamophobe,” and a “McCarthyite.” Your interview with Politico announcing that I am not going to be a witness came as a shock to me especially in light of the fact that I have been told over and over and over again that no witnesses had been selected. I have dutifully worked with your staff in trying to help you prepare for these meetings but obviously you don’t need my input. To be told over and over again for more than 8 weeks that no witnesses had been selected, beyond having worked with you and your staff for the last 8 years, only to read your interview yesterday, shows me that calculated deception is at play here. I apologize for having to use those words but there is no other explanation.

I had been planning on bringing in five new empirical ground breaking investigative reports, which our IPT staff has worked on assiduously for nearly two years, in surveying how all the Muslim Brotherhood legacy groups (CAIR, MPAC, MAS, ISNA, ICNA, IIIT, etc which control the Islamic “mainstream” community), have undeniably impeded FBI counter-terrorism efforts and have told their constituencies not to talk to talk to the FBI. I was even prepared to bring an amazing study showing that the claims of groups like MPAC which assert that Muslims have stopped a third of al terrorist attacks in this country to be demonstrably fiction and totally fabricated. And I was going to bring shocking secret video and audio of these Muslim groups’ closed door meetings that we took of their incendiary, anti-American, anti-FBI and anti-Semitic comments that these groups said behind closed doors . The film excerpts were going to be selected from our upcoming documentary, “Jihad in America 2: The Grand Deception.” I will be releasing those reports thru other congressional and media venues.

I was even going to bring in a special guest today and a VERY informed and connected source, who could have been very useful , possibly even critical to your hearing, but he too will not attend unless I do.

But now you won’t be needing our new empirical studies or input from my guest. During the days of Senator McCarthy, innocent writers were blacklisted and had to write under pseudonyms because of fear from the accusations of the dictatorial Senator. That you have caved in to the demands of radical Islamists in removing me as a witness, in light of the fact that no one in this country has done more empirical investigations about the attitudes and statements of the established Muslim leadership, shows me, to my utter horror, that McCarthyism is still alive today. Don’t take my word about my qualifications, just ask FBI agents, DOJ prosecutors, DHS agents, Treasury investigators, NYPD ct officials, etc.

I do not and will not intend on simply giving you our work without being seen. That happened once before in one of the most sordid periods of American history. I did see how you used the example yesterday in your interview that I had given to Adam about the Somali protests against CAIR, about which I had just sent to Adam the other day, without citing me as the source of information.

I want to thank you and your staff for refusing all contact, meetings and communication with me over the past 10 weeks which I can prove thru telephone records and emails that my assistant has saved. And I want to thank you for the disinformation I received from your office. You and your staff were the last people in the world who I thought would be capable of this behavior.

I am truly saddened by the turn of events that you and your staff, not me, engineered. Other congressional leaders, media columnists and former top government officials to whom I have spoken to since last night are just as shocked as me.

Oh, yes, I will follow one of the your pieces of advice when you gave an interview to the Forward newspaper about a month ago in response to being challenged by a reporter about the hearings, when you told the reporter to “go ask Steve Emerson, go ask Dan Pipes.” If asked, I certainly will let the media know of my new thoughts and feelings about what has transpired. And I will certainly let our supporters around the country know of my new thoughts.

This is really a shame. Its too bad as I had long thought you to be the most courageous member of the House of Representatives in taking on the radical Islamist groups. For years, I had been a long supporter of your singularly courageous efforts to respond to the deception perpetrated by radical Islamic groups in falsely claiming they were “moderate.” I praised your courageous efforts every place I could go. But sadly I cannot do that anymore. I want to wish you good luck and success. .

I am still prepared to meet you if you can explain to me the purpose of the meeting.

Sincerely yours,
Steve Emerson

KING'S RESPONSE

I was surprised and disappointed to hear that Steve Emerson feels slighted and somehow believes that my committee hearing on Muslim radicalization will not be effective without him testifying and that, among other things, I am guilty of “calculated deception” and that I consider Rep. “Ellison a better friend than” Steve Emerson.

The fact is that Steve Emerson has been extremely helpful to me over the years providing information and support. I was anticipating this same level of cooperation and support in preparation for the upcoming radicalization hearing which is why my staff was in repeated contact with him and I was scheduled to meet with him this afternoon.

At no time was it contemplated or suggested to Steve Emerson that he be a witness. I determined early on that to make the most meaningful impact, the lead witnesses would be Muslims who believe their community is being radicalized and that Muslim leaders are not sufficiently cooperating with law enforcement. Law enforcement officials would be also be asked to testify. I assumed that Steve Emerson would support these hearings and provide my staff and me with information and ideas.

It is unfortunate that Steve Emerson who acknowledges that I have been “the most courageous Member of the House of Representatives in taking on the radical Islamists groups” now says I “have caved in to the demands of radical Islamists” solely because he is not going to be a witness—especially since at no time was it ever suggested he would be. Ironically, it now appears that the two most outspoken critics of the radicalization hearing are Steve Emerson and CAIR.

I have fought this issue for more than nine years against strong opposition. I will go forward with this first hearing and subsequent hearings on this vital issue of radicalization, and, as always, will accept the assistance of all Americans who want to help in this cause. Protecting our nation from Islamic terrorism is larger than any one person.

This exchange could not be more ridiculous and embarrassing. It sounds like two high shool lovers breaking up. Doesn't the FBI and CIA keep an eye on radical muslims? I really don't see why King needs to waste tax payer money and time on hearings about this. For crying out loud how is this helping unemployment? So far the Republicans are not impressing anyone with their priorities.

Peter King is a well-known supporter of terrorists--IRA terrorists--for many years. King, speaking at a pro-IRA rally in Nassau County "We must pledge ourselves to support those brave men and women who this very moment are carrying forth the struggle against British imperialism in the streets of Belfast and Derry." In the 80's, King frequently traveled to Northern Ireland to meet with members of the IRA, calling the IRA "the legitimate voice of occupied Ireland." King became involved with NORAID, an organization that the British, Irish and United States governments accuse of financing IRA activities and providing them with weapons. In 2008. King spoke in defense of fugitive IRA member, Pol Brennan, who had broken out of prison during the Maze Prison escape and entered America illegally, was being held without bond. King said "My experience dealing with (Irish) republicans is that they don't jump bail in this country." So, not only did King openly and willingly support IRA terrorists, he supported a terrorist who entered this country illegally!!!!

It's so obnoxious and contrived with politicians write each other letters and then send the letters to their nearest blogger. It's nonsense. It's just a media stunt. There is nothing remotely genuine about these lettters.

Peter King has been on the case and so has Steve Emerson. I, too, have been disappointed in King of late, his ridiculous attempt at a law preventing guns within 1000 feet of our betters, like him, and now not having one of the most expert of witnesses testifying at a hearing designed to explore whether or not Islamists are making progress with the stealth jihad to infiltrate the USA and use our laws and customs to further their interest in abolishing our laws and customs and replacing it with Sharia Law. The comments above are breathtaking in their lack of understanding of what exactly is going on, i.e., a war that has been going on for centuries and is now fueled by our petrodollars. Peter King has been our enemies' enemy, which makes him our friend despite his past support for the IRA, if that is true. I hope he comes to his senses and invites Steve Emerson to testify, if not at this hearing, then at a future hearing.

Apparently the far right radicals missed the part in the comment about King's loyalty to IRA terrorists and NORAID, an organization that the British, Irish and UNITED STATES governments accused of financing IRA activities and providing them with weapons, weapons that were used to kill British police and soldiers. And King did this at a time while he was serving as a U.S. congressman. King also supported a IRA terrorist who broke out of prison and entered the U.S. ILLEGALLY.